Normally, capitalist
politicians do their utmost to confuse the issues and obscure their real
positions. So they must, because if they said what they truly intend to do,
they’d never get elected. Voters heading to the polls on January 23
across Canada
face the increasingly daunting challenge of distinguishing fact from fiction,
separating the sheep from the wolves. This difficulty is compounded by the fact
that the Liberal minority government was propped up for 7 of its 17 month
duration by the labour-based New Democratic Party, in
exchange for some progressive budgetary concessions — and then the
government was defeated by the combined votes of the NDP, the Conservative
Party and the Bloc Québécois, after the Liberals rejected an NDP demand for
legislation to ban further private inroads into public healthcare, and when
Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin refused to set an election date earlier than
March 2006.

Once the election campaign got
underway, opinion polls revealed that voters’ priorities are social
issues like health and education, followed by jobs and growth. But the major
big business parties focus on lower-ranked topics like ethics and taxes.

Why the
disconnect? There should be no mystery here.

Social expenditures have taken
a beating over the past two decades, at the hands of Liberals for the last
twelve years, and the Tories before that. Today, both parties try to disguise
their plans to continue to stifle social needs, in part by diverting attention
to scandals, personalities and so-called “national unity.”

This is not to say that the
infamous sponsorship scandal, in which $100 million went to Liberal-friendly
advertising agencies in Québec, resulting in criminal charges and the Gomery Commission laying blame on Liberal Party officials,
is of zero popular interest. In Québec it is a lightening rod of national
indignation, further discrediting the federal state which tries to buy favour but denies self-determination to the Québécois.

It’s just that political
corruption is only a tiny tip of the iceberg of social dysfunction and
discontent. Far deeper is the malaise and anger over the deterioration of
public health care, education, housing, transport and urban infrastructure
caused by the massive spending cuts which neither the Liberals nor the
Conservatives intend to reverse.

That brings us to what’s
really at stake in this election. It can be summed up as: the corporate agenda
(symbolized by tax cut proposals) versus social responsibility (represented by
all the targeted past gains of workers’ struggles). The remnants of the
post-war welfare state remain on the chopping block, notwithstanding Paul
Martin’s pre-election $20 billion burst of spending promises.

Martin’s differences with
Conservative leader Stephen Harper are purely tactical. Harper is simply more
frank about quickening the pace of privatization of public services, while
Martin prefers to do it by stealth, combined with layers of bafflegab woven
through an array of (unfunded) “priorities” like the national
childcare programme the Liberals have repeatedly promised
in elections since 1993.

With a softening of NDP
pressure from his left, Martin can be seen adapting to the right, promising a
ban on hand guns, a hard line on Québec, a bigger and more interventionist
military, and tax changes that favour the rich and
big corporations.

Where is the Canadian state
going?

The ruling class consensus is
to continue the accelerating march of privatization, labour
concessions, deregulation of the economy, and the shift of wealth to the
business elite.

Since foreign policy reflects
domestic policy (and vice-versa), it should come as no surprise that
neo-liberalism at home has its counterpart in the Canadian state’s
growing role as guarantor and military intervener on behalf of Canadian
corporate interests abroad, normally in alliance with Washington.

Jean Chrétien’s much
ballyhooed opting out of the Iraq misadventure and Paul Martin’s courteous
“no thanks” to Star Wars 2 are more than offset by the sizeable Canadian
intervention in Afghanistan, General Hillier’s bellicose and racist remarks
about killing “scum bags,” Ottawa’s war ships patrolling the
Persian Gulf, military personnel training Iraqi puppet troops in Jordan,
occupation forces on the ground in the Balkans, and not least, Canadian army
and police support to the coup, occupation and suppression of human rights in
Haiti. Canadian imperialism wasn’t born yesterday, but illusions in the “peacekeeper”
role are being rapidly incinerated on the altar of Paul Martin’s “duty
to protect” doctrine (the white man’s burden to “rescue”
the victims of “failed states” — themselves the victims of
imperialist domination) and Liberal star candidate Michael Ignatieff’s
qualified support to torture and imperialist invasions. Racial profiling,
arbitrary detention, secret trials, combined with “deep integration”
into U.S. social, foreign and defence policy,
including its food and drug safety laws, rounds out the picture. All of these
things Martin’s Liberals have done persistently, but quietly. Harper’s
Conservatives would do much the same, but openly and with fanfare.

Imperialism abroad would be of
little value without securing the imperial state at home. That means keeping Québec,
Acadians, and aboriginal peoples in their place. The rulers’ tool of
choice for Québec is the Clarity Act, by which the federal government arrogates
to itself the power to determine whether a future vote by Québec for
sovereignty is based on a sufficiently clear question with a sufficient
majority — and this is to be decided by Ottawa after the fact! Lurking
not far behind this intimidation tactic is “Plan B,” which includes
economic embargo, territorial partition and military intervention. Hardly a recipe for “free trade,” continental
cooperation, and democracy.

The resurgence of the Québec
independence movement, a product of rising national self-confidence and
impatience with Ottawa’s
neo-liberal agenda, as much as it is a reaction to ham-fisted federal
influence-buying schemes, makes the present election a kind of distorted
referendum in Québec. The routing of the federalist parties in Québec paves the
way to the next sovereignty vote, which will likely be a big blow to the
Canadian establishment and their state, albeit absent a mass Québec workers’
party to pose an anti-capitalist and sovereigntist
path forward.

While making some headway
through its progressive amendments to the June 2005 Liberal budget, the NDP has
lately suffered some setbacks, most of which are self-inflicted. Leader Jack
Layton’s slogan, “Making Parliament work,” was briefly useful
for extracting minor concessions from Paul Martin, but it also weakens NDP and labour autonomy from the ruling Liberals. This is evident
in at least two ways. Layton
is campaigning to win “more NDP seats,” not to form a government. Though
some claim this is a matter of “practicality,” it is really one of
principle. It implies that the prize is another Liberal minority government,
propped up by a somewhat larger NDP contingent. This is only a short step away
from Canadian Auto Workers’ chief Buzz Hargrove’s explicit call for
re-election of a minority Liberal regime, backed by a few more New Democrats.

It does not stop there. Making
a Liberal minority Parliament work has translated into NDP silence on the
military buildup, and on the Canadian occupation of Afghanistan
and Haiti.
It caused Layton
to reverse position (again) and embrace the undemocratic, anti-Québec Clarity
Act. It contributes to ambiguity on private health care facilities, which Layton says the NDP will
tolerate, but not fund. It leads to the utterly debilitating pledge of “no
tax increases and no new taxes,” combined with a defence
of the tax system status quo, including the hated Goods and Services Tax. In
the 2004 election, the NDP proposed to hike taxes for individuals with income
over $250,000 a year, to tax banks and corporations, to put a 40% tax on
inheritances over $1 million (excluding small business and family farms), and
to phase out the GST.

Everyone knows the existing
federal surplus will not adequately fund a reversal of the social cuts of the
past twenty years, least of all at the discretion of a Liberal regime bent on favouring the big banks with huge debt payments at
exorbitant interest rates. Opting for the status quo on taxation is tantamount
to accepting permanent economic injustice, including malnutrition,
homelessness, unsafe drinking water, preventable disease and illiteracy that affects millions. This regressive stance does more than
Hargrove’s treacherous opportunism to blur the line between the NDP and
the Liberal Party.

An alternative course

A clear alternative to this
direction is required in order to advance the interests of working people,
oppressed minorities, women, youth, seniors and the poor. To generate such an
alternative it is necessary to argue within the existing institutions of our
workers’ movement for working class independence in policy and action.

That necessarily begins with a
rejection of “lesser-evilism.” It means
saying No to “strategic voting” and No to an NDP-Liberal alliance. It
means making a clean break with Liberals, Tories, the Bloc and the Greens. It entails
fighting for a Workers’ Agenda.

Going into the last election,
the NDP was riding a wave of social struggles, including massive anti-war
mobilizations, public sector strikes in Newfoundland
and B.C., and huge anti-Liberal government protests of workers and students in Québec.
That momentum was squandered by a return to electoral routines.

Nonetheless, despite a
weakening of ties to the unions, the NDP remains the only mass-based, labour-linked political party in North
America — a party the business elite cannot and do not rely
upon to run the government in their class interest.

A victory for the NDP, in fact
any significant gains for the NDP, will foster better conditions for the entire
workers’ movement in challenging the ongoing neo-liberal agenda. For that
reason, we call for the election of an NDP government on January 23.

Jack Layton’s orientation
to “elect more New Democrats” rather than fight, in principle, for
an NDP government fuels the mendacious media mantra that the NDP can’t
win, that an NDP vote is a wasted vote — at which point “strategic voting”
to stop the ostensibly more right wing Conservatives is often proposed. This is
a lose-lose line for the NDP campaign. It should be
jettisoned by Layton
immediately.

Socialists stress that an NDP
government has the potential to open the road to social change by removing the
levers of government from the parties of big business. An NDP government could
increase the confidence and combativeness of those fighting the neo-liberal
agenda. Coupled with resurgent labour and social
movements, and a strengthened class struggle left wing inside the party, an NDP
government could shift the relationship of forces markedly in favour of the working class and its allies.

Socialists fight for an NDP
government which we strive to commit to socialist policies.

Thus, we urge a vote for the
NDP in every constituency.

This includes Québec, where the
party is weakest and enjoys little union support due to its historic hostility
to French language laws and to the goal of Québec
self-government. The Union des Forces Progressistes,
a growing labour-leftist coalition in Québec, will
fuse in February 2006 with Option Citoyenne, another
progressive nationalist movement. But neither organization is presenting
candidates in the current federal election, nor is there any serious working
class campaign for abstention.

The Bloc Québécois, despite its
social democratic image, is solidly linked to Québec business and to the former
Parti Québécois capitalist provincial regime.

The Green Party, polling at
about 4%, insists it is not part of the workers’ movement. It claims to
be “neither of the left or right.” For the purpose of this
election, we should take the Greens at their word, although it is evident that
their policies are quite regressive and certainly not class neutral.

Thus, the English-Canada labour-based NDP represents the only vehicle in this
election for independent working class political action across the Canadian
state.

Every gain for the NDP on
January 23 will be a gain for the working class.

The task of NDP militants now
is to link the party’s electoral campaign to the living struggles and
mobilizations of workers and the poor, especially to movements to end
imperialist intervention in the Middle East, to get Canada
out of Haiti,
to abrogate the corporate “free trade” deals, and support strikes
that challenge cuts to jobs and vital services.

In light of NDP regression on
the Clarity Act and on Québec’s right to national self-government, we
make special allowance for the possibility of supporting alternative candidates
in Québec who stand for independence and socialism.

A Workers’ Agenda…for
a change!

In calling for a vote for the
NDP in the vast majority of constituencies, we fight equally strongly for a
Workers’ Agenda, which should include the following policies:

•Roll back gasoline and oil home
heating fuel prices 25%, and cap them at that level. Nationalize the energy industry
under democratic workers’ and community control. Use a large portion of
energy revenues to fund research and development of safe, clean energy
alternatives.

•Wage war on poverty. Jobs for all.
Shorten the work week, without loss of pay or benefits. Raise the minimum wage
to $12/hour. Extend Employment Insurance to cover all unemployed workers, at
80% of insured wages, with a low threshold qualifying period, with benefits for
up to 52 weeks, and the ability to renew a claim without penalty. Devote 2% of
the federal budget to the construction of social housing. Reverse the
privatization of public services and the de-regulation of the economy. Re-nationalize
Air Canada
and the railroads. Stop the layoffs. Open the corporate books. Expand public
ownership into the means of communication, natural resources, the banks, land
development and construction. Elect managers, subject to recall by employee
assemblies; limit salaries of elected officials to the level of pay for skilled
labour in the represented occupational sector. Extend
and defend the right to strike for all workers.

•Withdraw Canadian forces from Afghanistan, Haiti,
the Middle East, and the Balkans. For a
foreign policy based on solidarity, internationalism, and social justice. Not
one penny for imperialist war and occupation. Confine Canada’s
armed forces to a rescue and disaster relief role, and cut the military budget
accordingly. Defend revolutionary Cuba
and the Bolivarian republic
of Venezuela. Work for
freedom now for the Five Cuban anti-terrorists imprisoned in the U.S., for Mumia Abu-Jamal, Leonard Peltier,
and all social justice political prisoners.

•Self-determination for Québec and
Aboriginal Peoples. Repeal the Clarity Act.

•Reverse the attack on civil
liberties; end secret trials, stop “extraordinary rendition” to
torture states, free the political detainees, welcome
the war resistors. Revoke the so-called “anti-terrorism” laws. For
full and equal rights for women, lesbians, gays and bisexual people, and for
racial and ethnic minorities. Defend choice on abortion, the right to marriage
for same-sex couples, and affirmative action for women and minorities in
employment and education. Abolish the Senate and establish directly
proportional representation in the House of Commons and provincial
legislatures.

•Save the environment; force the
corporations to clean up their mess. Phase out the nuclear industry. Place a
very high priority on ecological protection, clean energy generation, and on
meeting and exceeding the Kyoto Accord targets on reducing green house gas
emissions.

•Fund cheap mass public transit and
urban renewal. Ensure that cities have guaranteed, stable and sufficient
revenues, based on progressive taxation, plus the statutory authority to plan
urban development.

•Significantly increase taxes on
the wealthy, on capital gains, on speculative financial transactions, on
inheritances above $1 million, and on the giant corporations and the banks. Abolish
the GST.

•Abrogate the corporate trade
deals, FTA, NAFTA, and the FTAA, and institute fair trade practices with
diverse partners. Draw on the positive example of the Venezuela-Cuba sponsored
Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) which features bilateral
cooperation, a Compensatory Fund to help weaker economies, and non-exploitative
joint ventures.

To learn more about Socialist
Action, we invite you to read Socialist Action monthly newspaper.